Jose A. Perez v. Physician Assistant Board, et al.

This Court has ruled that in the case of a pro se litigant, the courts must, sua sponte, grant leave to amend the complaint to correct curable defects and/or correct defective jurisdictional allegations, Scarborough v. PrThcipi 124 S.Ct. 1856, 541 U.S. 401, 158 L.Ed.2d 674 (U.S. 05/03/2004) citing Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757 (2001), 28 U.S.C. § 1653 and Rule 15(c) Federal Rule Civil Procedure. Furthermore, Rule 54(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directs trial courts to "grant the relief to which each party is entitled, even if the party has not demanded that relief in its pleadings, Engel v. Teleprompter Corp., 732 F.2d 1238 (5th Cir. 05/25/1984); In re Railworks Corporation, 760 F.3d 398 (4th Cir. 2014); QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether Mr. Perez can amend his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1653 and 15(c) F.R.C.P., to allege that a State cannot exclude a person from the practice of medicine in a manner or for reasons that contravene the Due Process or Equal Protection. Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Sch ware v. Board Bar Examiners NewMexico, 353 U.S. 232 (1957), Dent v. West Virginia, 129 U.S. 114 (1889). Whether Mr. Perez can amend his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1653 and 15(c) F.R.C.P., to allege that the continued enforcement of an unconstitutional statute cannot be insulated by the statute of limitations. Va. Hosp. Ass'n v. Babies, 868 F.2d 653, 663 (4th Cir. 1989), affd sub nom. Wilder v. Va. Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498 (1990).